S. 1514: Saving Coal Jobs Act of 2013
Before you vote › Federal bills
S. 1514: Saving Coal Jobs Act of 2013
113th Congress · introduced 2013-09-17 · Environmental Protection · Latest: Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 191.
federal
Follow this bill, step by step
- Where it came from: introduced 2013-09-17 · official record
- Who proposed it: Sen. McConnell, Mitch [R-KY] · what a sponsor is
- What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
- Where it stands now: Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 191. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
- If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.
Official title
Saving Coal Jobs Act of 2013
Plain summary
Saving Coal Jobs Act of 2013 - Prohibits the head of a federal agency from promulgating any regulation relating to power sector carbon pollution standards or any substantially similar regulation on or after June 25, 2013, unless that regulation is explicitly authorized by Congress. Amends the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act or CWA) to revise the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or a state acting pursuant to an equivalent approved state program (permitting authority) to base a determination on approving a new or renewed permit covering discharges from a structure only on compliance with regulations issued by such permitting authority. Prohibits such permitting authority from basing such determination on the extent of the permit applicant's adherence to guidance issued by the Administrator, including: (1) the comprehensive guidance issued by the Administrator and dated April 1, 2010, (2) the proposed guidance entitled "Draft Guidance on Identifying Waters Protected by the Clean Water Act" and dated April 28, 2011, and (3) the final guidance proposed by the Administrator and dated July 21, 2011. Authorizes an applicant, if the permitting authority does not approve or deny an application for a new permit within 270 days after the date of receipt of an application, to operate as if the application were approved. Prohibits the Administrator from disapproving or withdrawing approval of a state permit program under NPDES based on: (1) the failure of such program to incorporate or comply with such guidance, or (2) the implementation of a water quality standard that has been adopted by the state and approved by the Administrator. Establishes environmental review requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) for permits to discharge dredged or fill material into navigable waters. Removes the authority of the EPA to prohibit the specification, or restrict the use, of an area as a disposal site for discharges of dredged or fill materials into waters of the United States once the Army Corps of Engineers has issued a permit for the discharge. Requires the Administrator: (1) before issuing a regulation, policy statement, guidance, response to a petition, or other requirement or implementing a new or substantially altered program under the CWA, to analyze the impact of such action on employment levels or economic activity in each state; and (2) upon concluding that such action will have more than a de minimis negative impact on employment levels or economic activity in a state, to hold a public hearing in each such state at least 30 days prior to the effective date of the action and to give notice of such impact to the state's congressional delegation, governor, and legislature at least 45 days before such effective date. Prohibits the Secretary of the Army and the Administrator from: (1) finalizing, adopting, implementing, administering, or enforcing the proposed guidance described in the notice of availability and request for comments entitled "EPA and Army Corps of Engineers Guidance Regarding Identification of Waters Protected by the Clean Water Act"; or (2) using such Guidance, or any substantially similar guidance made publicly available on or after December 3, 2008, as the basis for any decision regarding the scope of the CWA or any rulemaking. Provides that the use of such guidance as the basis for any rule shall be grounds for vacating such rule. Prohibits the Administrator from: (1) promulgating a revised or new water quality standard for a pollutant when the Administrator has approved a state water quality standard for such pollutant unless the state concurs with the Administrator's determination that the revised or new standard is necessary to meet CWA requirements; or (2) taking action to supersede a state's determination that a discharge will comply with effluent limitations, water quality standards, controls on the discharge of pollutants, and toxic and pretreatment effluent standards under the CWA. Authorizes states to disregard, accept, or modify the Administrator's disagreement with, and recommendations for, a state's identification of: (1) waters as areas with insufficient controls, and (2) pollutants suitable for maximum daily load measurement.
Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.
What a vote does
A “Yea” vote
If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.
A “Nay” vote
If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.
PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).
What does this mean? (plain words)
Official text
Saving Coal Jobs Act of 2013
Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate)
AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text
No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.
Limited to a few requests an hour per person.
The strongest published arguments
Arguments for (supporters)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Arguments against (opponents)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Alternatives
Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes
Officials and money
Sponsor: Sen. McConnell, Mitch [R-KY] · 0 cosponsors
Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.
Sponsor's campaign money: Sen. McConnell, Mitch [R-KY] reported raising $278,697 (2025–2026). Details. Shown for context only; it does not mean any donor supported this bill.
No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.
Words on this page, explained (3)
- Authorization
- A law that creates or continues a government program and says what it may do, often with a suggested spending ceiling. An authorization alone does not provide money; a separate appropriation does.
- Legislature
- The elected body that makes laws. In Texas it has a House of Representatives (150 members) and a Senate (31 members). In Florida it has a House of Representatives (120 members) and a Senate (40 members).
- Rulemaking
- The process agencies use to write regulations that carry out laws passed by Congress or a legislature. Usually an agency publishes a proposed rule, takes public comments, then publishes a final rule.
Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.
Sources
- Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate)
- Congress.gov
- Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-113s1514.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/113/s>
Record fed-us-cong113-s1514 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong113 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong113